Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

policies:consenus_policy [2015/12/09 02:54]
walter created 		policies:consenus_policy [2015/12/09 02:54] (current)
walter
Line 25: Line 25:
  
 — decision making process that develops solutions based on balancing values instead of defending positions; a decision made through the consensus process — decision making process that develops solutions based on balancing values instead of defending positions; a decision made through the consensus process
 +
     *     *
  
Line 30: Line 31:
  
 — someone who has a vested interest in the outcome of a decision and is often directly affected by the outcome — someone who has a vested interest in the outcome of a decision and is often directly affected by the outcome
 +
     *     *
  
Line 35: Line 37:
  
 — specific language describing the details of the decision to be made — specific language describing the details of the decision to be made
 +
     *     *
  
Line 40: Line 43:
  
 — official step in consensus process to ratify a proposal as a final decision, each participant is polled for their level of support (in favor, stand aside, block), proposal is ratified as long as there are no participants who block — official step in consensus process to ratify a proposal as a final decision, each participant is polled for their level of support (in favor, stand aside, block), proposal is ratified as long as there are no participants who block
 +
     *     *
  
Line 45: Line 49:
  
 — unofficial poll of the the level of support for the proposal, often done with show of thumbs — unofficial poll of the the level of support for the proposal, often done with show of thumbs
 +
     *     *
  
Line 50: Line 55:
  
 — term used to denote support for a proposal in its current form, sometimes signified with a "thumbs up" — term used to denote support for a proposal in its current form, sometimes signified with a "thumbs up"
 +
     *     *
  
Line 55: Line 61:
  
 — term used to denote a willingness to “live with” proposal in its current form, while preferring a different outcome. (possible reasons to stand aside include having minor concerns or objections based on personal preference rather than adherence to criteria, or not being directly affected by the outcome), sometimes signified with a "thumbs to the side" — term used to denote a willingness to “live with” proposal in its current form, while preferring a different outcome. (possible reasons to stand aside include having minor concerns or objections based on personal preference rather than adherence to criteria, or not being directly affected by the outcome), sometimes signified with a "thumbs to the side"
 +
     *     *
  
Line 60: Line 67:
  
 — term used to denote opposition to the proposal in its current form, a consensus cannot be reached while there are one or more blocks, sometimes signified with a "thumbs down" — term used to denote opposition to the proposal in its current form, a consensus cannot be reached while there are one or more blocks, sometimes signified with a "thumbs down"
 +
     *     *
  
Line 65: Line 73:
  
 — amount of support in a group for a decision — amount of support in a group for a decision
 +
     *     *
  
Line 70: Line 79:
  
 — opinions specifying desired details of a decision (for example: the car must be red) — opinions specifying desired details of a decision (for example: the car must be red)
 +
     *     *
  
Line 75: Line 85:
  
 — principles that have direct bearing on the decision at hand (for example: the leading character's car should look fast) — principles that have direct bearing on the decision at hand (for example: the leading character's car should look fast)
 +
     *     *
  
Line 80: Line 91:
  
 — the underlying “good” that needs to be served by final decision. (for example: selling lots of tickets to 15-30 year-old men) — the underlying “good” that needs to be served by final decision. (for example: selling lots of tickets to 15-30 year-old men)
 +
     *     *
  
Line 85: Line 97:
  
 — the interests and values that must be honored for the final decision to be acceptable. — the interests and values that must be honored for the final decision to be acceptable.
 +
     *     *
  
Line 90: Line 103:
  
 — questions asked by participants to help them understand what the proposal means — questions asked by participants to help them understand what the proposal means
 +
     *     *
  
Line 95: Line 109:
  
 — points raised by participants to describe aspects of the proposal that may be weak or in need of improvement — points raised by participants to describe aspects of the proposal that may be weak or in need of improvement
 +
     *     *
  
Line 103: Line 118:
 Section 3: Who Participates in Consensus Decisions Section 3: Who Participates in Consensus Decisions
  
-A critical aspect of consensus decisions is defining participants-- that is who contributes ideas, offers feedback, and ultimately has the right to approve or block the decision.  Naturally, all Quelab Board members are always included as participants in Quelab consensus decisions.  In order to promote representation of the views of all stakeholders in a decision, the Quelab board will also include participants beyond its own members when doing so is necessary to ensure the views of the entire organization are considered.+A critical aspect of consensus decisions is defining participants– that is who contributes ideas, offers feedback, and ultimately has the right to approve or block the decision.  Naturally, all Quelab Board members are always included as participants in Quelab consensus decisions.  In order to promote representation of the views of all stakeholders in a decision, the Quelab board will also include participants beyond its own members when doing so is necessary to ensure the views of the entire organization are considered.
  
 Examples of possible guest participants include, but are not limited to, Quelab members and staff who are directly impacted by the decision at hand, community stakeholders, volunteers, representatives from partner or potential partner organizations when the decision directly impacts organization or partnership in question.  The inclusion of guest participants in a consensus decision will follow an open and planned process. The decision to include guest participants will be made well before the consensus process begins, and will be clearly documented.  Guest participants will be given an invitation to participate that includes sufficient notice to prepare for the work. Examples of possible guest participants include, but are not limited to, Quelab members and staff who are directly impacted by the decision at hand, community stakeholders, volunteers, representatives from partner or potential partner organizations when the decision directly impacts organization or partnership in question.  The inclusion of guest participants in a consensus decision will follow an open and planned process. The decision to include guest participants will be made well before the consensus process begins, and will be clearly documented.  Guest participants will be given an invitation to participate that includes sufficient notice to prepare for the work.
Line 116: Line 131:
  
 Selection of Officers Selection of Officers
 +
     *     *
  
 Removal of Board members Removal of Board members
 +
     *     *
  
 Approval of annual budgets Approval of annual budgets
 +
     *     *
  
 Decisions involving compensation Decisions involving compensation
 +
     *     *
  
 Changes to the Articles of Incorporation Changes to the Articles of Incorporation
 +
     *     *
  
 Changes to the Bylaws Changes to the Bylaws
 +
     *     *
  
Line 145: Line 166:
 Ground rules Ground rules
  
-—Quelab will use the following ground rules, developed by +—Quelab will use the following ground rules, developed by [[[[http://www.schwarzassociates.com/|http://www.schwarzassociates.com/]]|
-[[http://www.schwarzassociates.com/|+
  
 Roger Schwarz Roger Schwarz
  
- as part of +as part of [[[[http://www.schwarzassociates.com/facilitator/189/The-Skilled-Facilitator-Intensive-Workshop/|http://www.schwarzassociates.com/facilitator/189/The-Skilled-Facilitator-Intensive-Workshop/]]|
-[[http://www.schwarzassociates.com/facilitator/189/The-Skilled-Facilitator-Intensive-Workshop/|+
  
 The Skilled Facilitator The Skilled Facilitator
  
- approach for consensus decisions: +approach for consensus decisions: 
-      *+ 
 +    *
  
 Test assumptions and inferences. Test assumptions and inferences.
-      *+ 
 +    *
  
 Share all relevant information Share all relevant information
-      *+ 
 +    *
  
 Use specific examples and agree on what important words mean. Use specific examples and agree on what important words mean.
-      *+ 
 +    *
  
 Explain your reasoning and intent. Explain your reasoning and intent.
-      *+ 
 +    *
  
 Focus on interests, not positions. Focus on interests, not positions.
-      *+ 
 +    *
  
 Combine advocacy and inquiry. Combine advocacy and inquiry.
-      *+ 
 +    *
  
 Jointly design next steps and ways to test disagreements. Jointly design next steps and ways to test disagreements.
-      *+ 
 +    *
  
 Discuss undiscussable issues. Discuss undiscussable issues.
Line 207: Line 234:
 After the proposal has been drafted it comes back to the full group for review, discussion and further action in the following order. After the proposal has been drafted it comes back to the full group for review, discussion and further action in the following order.
  
-      -+    -
  
 Clarify the proposal Clarify the proposal
Line 213: Line 240:
 Group members ask questions one at a time about the meaning of the proposal. Each clarification should be finished before the next is asked. As necessary, the proposal language is refined to improve clarity. Group members ask questions one at a time about the meaning of the proposal. Each clarification should be finished before the next is asked. As necessary, the proposal language is refined to improve clarity.
  
-      -+    -
  
 Address concerns Address concerns
Line 219: Line 246:
 Group members raise any concerns one at a time and discuss potential improvements to the proposal. This process continues until all concerns have been addressed (either resolved by modifying proposal, or noted but allowed to stand). Concerns should be addressed in terms of criteria not met by the proposal or group values that may be violated though the proposal as it currently stands. Group members raise any concerns one at a time and discuss potential improvements to the proposal. This process continues until all concerns have been addressed (either resolved by modifying proposal, or noted but allowed to stand). Concerns should be addressed in terms of criteria not met by the proposal or group values that may be violated though the proposal as it currently stands.
  
-      -+    -
  
 Call for consensus Call for consensus
Line 227: Line 254:
 Group members are asked, one at a time, to indicate if they are "in favor", "stand aside", or "block" the proposal; if there are any blocks, see Section 7 for how to resolve them, otherwise go to next step. Group members are asked, one at a time, to indicate if they are "in favor", "stand aside", or "block" the proposal; if there are any blocks, see Section 7 for how to resolve them, otherwise go to next step.
  
-      -+    -
  
 Record final decision Record final decision
Line 261: Line 288:
 Periodically, the participants should check to see if the solution represents a complete decision.  If the answer to the following questions is no, then the solution represents a complete decision and should be recorded in the appropriate set of minutes Periodically, the participants should check to see if the solution represents a complete decision.  If the answer to the following questions is no, then the solution represents a complete decision and should be recorded in the appropriate set of minutes
  
-      -+    -
  
 anyone feels there is anything missing from the solution anyone feels there is anything missing from the solution
-      -+ 
 +    -
  
 anyone has any questions about the solution anyone has any questions about the solution
-      -+ 
 +    -
  
 anyone has any additional concerns about the solution anyone has any additional concerns about the solution
-      -+ 
 +    -
  
 anyone is uncomfortable with the solution anyone is uncomfortable with the solution
Line 283: Line 313:
  
 key elements of the decision are not being addressed key elements of the decision are not being addressed
 +
     *     *
  
 when one of the agreed upon criteria is not being met when one of the agreed upon criteria is not being met
 +
     *     *
  
 when the decision is likely to create real danger or harm to the organization, its members, or any other people or organizations when the decision is likely to create real danger or harm to the organization, its members, or any other people or organizations
 +
     *     *